The left throw it around like the very word has healing powers.
As for Time - my guess is they don't have enough people willing to pay - so the someone like Soros can fund it and it can be another mouthpiece for The Party (D).
As for Time - my guess is they don't have enough people willing to pay - so the someone like Soros can fund it and it can be another mouthpiece for The Party (D).
4/27/23, 12:34 PM
It's already a mouthpiece for the Party (D). That's why they are giving it away for free.
*dā-, Proto-Indo-European root meaning "to divide."
It forms all or part of: betide; daimon; Damocles; deal (v.); deal (n.1) "part, portion;" demagogue; demiurge; democracy; demography; demon; demotic; dole; endemic; epidemic; eudaemonic; geodesic; geodesy; ordeal; pandemic; pandemonium; tidal; tide (n.) "rise and fall of the sea;" tidings; tidy; time; zeitgeist.
It is the hypothetical source of/evidence for its existence is provided by: Sanskrit dati "cuts, divides;" Greek dēmos "people, land," perhaps literally "division of society," daiesthai "to divide;" Old Irish dam "troop, company;" Old English tid "point or portion of time," German Zeit "time."
"Time to remove digital paywall"....once we figured out we'll never get enough people to pay for it, because our content is of no real value...we'll just....uh....lets see now....give it away for free as if it was always our intent!!!
Under the old dead tree model, advertising sales paid for the cost of producing the magazine. Subscription costs were just for postage. Which is why newsstand prices were so much higher--newsstand sales weren't as valuable to advertisers because they were more random, you couldn't anticipate or know much about who's buying.
If we continue to follow the logic, all this stuff should be free since mailing costs no longer exist; paywalls should have never gone up. Getting more eyeballs in the door is much more valuable than the pittance paid by subscribers.
If we continue to follow the logic, all this stuff should be free since mailing costs no longer exist; paywalls should have never gone up. Getting more eyeballs in the door is much more valuable than the pittance paid by subscribers. ========== how then to explain streaming services with subscription?
'paywall paid by any other name' >>> Fees paid by cable carriers
Fox Corporation sales depend in part on fees paid by cable carriers like Comcast and Dish Network that distribute the company's broadcasts.
Over the three months ending in December, such fees delivered $1.7 billion or 37% of Fox Corporation revenue, the company's latest earnings report showed.
Time Magazine's paywall has always implied there's something worth the money spent on the other side of the wall, but there never was and everyone knew it. Consequently, the paywall costs Time Magazine more to administer than it yields in revenue, hence the "democratization".
Once in Frankfurt, I bought a Time in English. In it, Arthur C. Clarke had written a piece about a way to launch rockets using a cable and platform to save fuel. For kicks I wrote a song about it and sent it to him in Sri Lanka. He actually wrote back. That was decades ago and the last Time I ever bought. Pretty ungrateful of me.
I really have grown to hate the word "Content." It seems to me that the younger generations are being deliberately trained on repetition and reinforcement of false ideals. There really is no more innovation or growth involved. Just cram as many untruths as you can fit onto your website, and try to make sure everyone sees it.
Mark writes "I assume Time's subscription worked about as well as Twitter's subscription model currently is."
As usual, Mark assumes incorrectly. Time is a discredited brand, which is why its current owners were able to purchase its desiccated husk for literal pennies. Unfortunately, years of insipid content have done its predictable work. On the other hand, Twitter is finally poised to achieve a profit in fiscal 2024, something Twitter has failed to show in years. It was Twitter's red ink that made Elon's whirlwind purchase offer so attractive to the shareholders.
Time Magazine had the ill fortune to transition from ink on paper to bits in cyberspace just as the last of the real journalists lauded on its masthead retired, clearing the decks for a horde of J-school propagandists to swarm over the gunnels and drive the good ship Time onto the lee shore of wokism. So there she rots, grounded and worm-eaten. Arrrh.
In high school and college I used to lug around milk crates full of Time magazines for my speech tournaments. (extemporaneous speaking) I haven't read Time (or U.S. News, and I think there was a third one) since college graduation.
In high school and college I used to lug around milk crates full of Time magazines for my speech tournaments. (extemporaneous speaking) I haven't read Time (or U.S. News, and I think there was a third one) since college graduation.
Quaestor, I believe Twitter is going to turn a profit about as much as I believe Musk's claims that Tesla will be self driving this year (something he has incorrectly claimed for years now)
Support the Althouse blog by doing your Amazon shopping going in through the Althouse Amazon link.
Amazon
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Support this blog with PayPal
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
44 comments:
--- Time CEO
Oh, Althouse! Everyone knows Time went defunct years ago. You are such a nostalgian.
"Time to remove digital paywall"
Paywalls coming down, Substacks going up: everyone's reverting to the Althouse model.
Democracy!
The left throw it around like the very word has healing powers.
As for Time - my guess is they don't have enough people willing to pay - so the someone like Soros can fund it and it can be another mouthpiece for The Party (D).
As for Time - my guess is they don't have enough people willing to pay - so the someone like Soros can fund it and it can be another mouthpiece for The Party (D).
4/27/23, 12:34 PM
It's already a mouthpiece for the Party (D). That's why they are giving it away for free.
Does Time even still exist?
They sent me their magazine for free, for Years and Years.. But they must of ran out of money for that too
tip toe thru MY typos. my keyboard is overwhelmed with the higher power of DEMOCRACY!
da-
*dā-, Proto-Indo-European root meaning "to divide."
It forms all or part of: betide; daimon; Damocles; deal (v.); deal (n.1) "part, portion;" demagogue; demiurge; democracy; demography; demon; demotic; dole; endemic; epidemic; eudaemonic; geodesic; geodesy; ordeal; pandemic; pandemonium; tidal; tide (n.) "rise and fall of the sea;" tidings; tidy; time; zeitgeist.
It is the hypothetical source of/evidence for its existence is provided by: Sanskrit dati "cuts, divides;" Greek dēmos "people, land," perhaps literally "division of society," daiesthai "to divide;" Old Irish dam "troop, company;" Old English tid "point or portion of time," German Zeit "time."
What lies beneath.
We believe in the democratization of content.
Translation: Nobody's willing to pay for our crap.
"We believe that our paywall model has failed and we must rely on free content with ads to survive."
Time | Life
Life magazine is gone. Time might as well go away because weekly news recaps died a full 20 years ago.
Time magazine is in trouble? Dental offices of the world unite!
"Time to remove digital paywall"....once we figured out we'll never get enough people to pay for it, because our content is of no real value...we'll just....uh....lets see now....give it away for free as if it was always our intent!!!
That's the ticket!
Yeahhhhh…how many of those ‘subscribers’ are paying subscribers? …and is this the same TIME what offered me a subscription for $1 a while back?
I’m uncertain why their leftie leaders are interested in yet another outlet for their propaganda at a time when they are consolidating others?
Under the old dead tree model, advertising sales paid for the cost of producing the magazine. Subscription costs were just for postage. Which is why newsstand prices were so much higher--newsstand sales weren't as valuable to advertisers because they were more random, you couldn't anticipate or know much about who's buying.
If we continue to follow the logic, all this stuff should be free since mailing costs no longer exist; paywalls should have never gone up. Getting more eyeballs in the door is much more valuable than the pittance paid by subscribers.
No one was paying, that's why. They'll take whatever ad revenue they can and be happy.
The number of people buying their explanation equals the number buying their subscriptions: few.
The people can find out who is man of the year.
Maybe I'm cynical.
I conclude that they've decided they'll get more ad revenue than what they'll miss from subscription revenue. Follow the money.
DEMOCRACY! for most democrats is the welcome corrupt condition of a ONE PARTY STATE.
They have nothing anybody wants to read.
I suppose that this means that even librarians, spending other peoples' money, were no longer willing to pony up.
Paywall, shmaywall - - I wouldn't read anything time printed if they paid ME to read it!
Didn't Time used to run the Clintoons comic strip back in the 90s? That was droll.
Time has their archive available, without a paywall?
TIL
If we continue to follow the logic, all this stuff should be free since mailing costs no longer exist; paywalls should have never gone up. Getting more eyeballs in the door is much more valuable than the pittance paid by subscribers.
==========
how then to explain streaming services with subscription?
'paywall paid by any other name' >>> Fees paid by cable carriers
Fox Corporation sales depend in part on fees paid by cable carriers like Comcast and Dish Network that distribute the company's broadcasts.
Over the three months ending in December, such fees delivered $1.7 billion or 37% of Fox Corporation revenue, the company's latest earnings report showed.
Democracy.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Interesting factoid ...
"It only costs 19 cents per piece to send out a volume of magazines under USPS periodicals."
Simple Fulfillment
As Mad Magazine used to say, "Cheap!"
Interesting factoid ...
"It only costs 19 cents per piece to send out a volume of magazines under USPS periodicals."
Simple Fulfillment
As Mad Magazine used to say, "Cheap!"
And the readers are still going to be overpaying.
its dead jim, died of trump derangement syndrome
I think this is a good thing. I hope other media institutions will follow suit. The more free speech, the better.
I assume Time's subscription worked about as well as Twitter's subscription model currently is.
If there's no great value added, people aren't gonna pay.
Time Magazine's paywall has always implied there's something worth the money spent on the other side of the wall, but there never was and everyone knew it. Consequently, the paywall costs Time Magazine more to administer than it yields in revenue, hence the "democratization".
"Time" has a paywall?
Who? I mean...WHO? Would pay for "Time" Magazine?
Once in Frankfurt, I bought a Time in English. In it, Arthur C. Clarke had written a piece about a way to launch rockets using a cable and platform to save fuel. For kicks I wrote a song about it and sent it to him in Sri Lanka. He actually wrote back. That was decades ago and the last Time I ever bought. Pretty ungrateful of me.
There is no business case for paying people to produce a product given away for free.
I really have grown to hate the word "Content." It seems to me that the younger generations are being deliberately trained on repetition and reinforcement of false ideals. There really is no more innovation or growth involved. Just cram as many untruths as you can fit onto your website, and try to make sure everyone sees it.
Last gasp.
Try some real reporting of real news without bias, Time.
Mark writes "I assume Time's subscription worked about as well as Twitter's subscription model currently is."
As usual, Mark assumes incorrectly. Time is a discredited brand, which is why its current owners were able to purchase its desiccated husk for literal pennies. Unfortunately, years of insipid content have done its predictable work. On the other hand, Twitter is finally poised to achieve a profit in fiscal 2024, something Twitter has failed to show in years. It was Twitter's red ink that made Elon's whirlwind purchase offer so attractive to the shareholders.
Time Magazine had the ill fortune to transition from ink on paper to bits in cyberspace just as the last of the real journalists lauded on its masthead retired, clearing the decks for a horde of J-school propagandists to swarm over the gunnels and drive the good ship Time onto the lee shore of wokism. So there she rots, grounded and worm-eaten. Arrrh.
When does their Trans of the Year issue come out?
When does their Trans of the Year issue come out?
No such thing. It's like saying "I remember back..." - it's redundant. A trans woman is a woman. A trans man is a man.
Right?
Mark writes "I assume Time's subscription worked about as well as Twitter's subscription model currently is."
Quaestor: "As usual, Mark assumes incorrectly."
He ain't known as Dumb Lefty Mark for nuttin'.
In high school and college I used to lug around milk crates full of Time magazines for my speech tournaments. (extemporaneous speaking) I haven't read Time (or U.S. News, and I think there was a third one) since college graduation.
In high school and college I used to lug around milk crates full of Time magazines for my speech tournaments. (extemporaneous speaking) I haven't read Time (or U.S. News, and I think there was a third one) since college graduation.
Quaestor, I believe Twitter is going to turn a profit about as much as I believe Musk's claims that Tesla will be self driving this year (something he has incorrectly claimed for years now)
Post a Comment